J'accuse: The Bohemian Interlude

In which J’accuse discusses Saints Cyrus and Juventius, censorship home and abroad and the committee of obscenities.

Quelli che aspettano San Siro… (Those who wait for St Syrus)

San Siro remains an enigma to me. I am not talking about the stadium, which I will hopefully be visiting next Thursday, but about the saint. Apparently, Siro turns out to be Syrus in English (Latin?) and there seems to be more than one saint going by that name – at least insofar as my researches on the waves of the net can go. I am guilty here of relying solely on the information that the ether can provide but that must be in some way attributable to the bug caught from reading Dan Brown’s ultra-predictable The Lost Symbol over the last few days.

My prayers to San Siro have only partially been answered since Inter and Juventus WILL, after all, be facing each other on the 28th of January as planned. The mid-week visit to the city of Saint Ambrosius (born in Trier a few miles away from where I write) need not be replanned. But – and there seems to be more than one recurring “but” in this damned trip – the Osservatorio that monitors fan behaviour in Italy has decreed that the cup match between Internazionale and Juventus will be closed to Juventus fans. In order to ensure that no bianconeri attempt will whittle away the already generous home advantage that paperworks Inter have on the day, tickets will only be made available to residents of the province of Milan.

Which is not exactly great, is it? Now I am hoping that the prohibition in question refers to an organised movement of fans and not to individual Maltese football fans who will happen to be in Milan on the day of the match. Fingers remain resolutely crossed while I continue to explore the history of this not so famous San Siro. Up until now, the only Saint Syrus I have come across is a San Siro of Pavia. This Cyril or Syrus is interesting enough because legend has it that he was the young fellow who brought the five loaves of bread to Jesus that would later be multiplied for the famished crowd (the loaves, not Jesus).

Even more interesting is the story of the grown up Siro who, as legend would continue to have it, travelled to and evangelised the city of Pavia while battling the Arians (a heretic sect who denied the divinity of Christ). And this is where the twist and coincidence happens that makes my relating this story worthwhile. For in his evangelisation and battles with Arianism, legend would go on having it (carry on the legend) that San Siro was accompanied by a faithful evangelical companion. The aforementioned companion went by the name of Saint Juventius – which only goes to show doesn’t it?

Notes from a Big Country

Bloggable news attracts bloggers as a light bulb attracts moths. This week, most of the interesting news (by blogger standards) happened towards the end and far away from the continent. While the Haiti tragedy obviously dominated the front pages of the worldwide media, events in the US of A unfolded after Thursday that make for some perusing and commenting. Sadly, a packed week on the work front meant that the bloggable news has not made the pages of J’accuse except for some comments by that falcon who dispenses regular crit under the pseudonym Fausto.

Censorship was on the agenda in the States, too, and while Hillary Clinton was busy criticising forms of censorship on the web, she might have taken a leaf out of Google’s book in its battle with the Chinese authorities. Google seems to have belatedly realised that sacrificing freedoms to penetrate the Chinese market was not exactly a smart move – especially from the Do No Evil Empire. Google’s power as a search engine in China is infinitesimally small compared to more established engines behind the Great Wall but still it has managed to get its message through to the mandarins in the palaces inside the Forbidden City.

… and from a Small Island

A comment relating to censorship has been left on a blog post of mine as I type. “Mat” points out the latest news from Gozo where Bishop Mario Grech is urging the use of the “precautionary principle” when it comes to censorship. From the news item: “Society should have the power to intervene to curb what could be damaging to an individual’s educational process on the basis of the principle of precaution, Gozo Bishop Mario Grech said. In an homily dedicated to censorship during Mass for journalists, Mgr Grech called for the adoption of this European principle in media products.”

Whenever I read this kind of report I always have to remind myself that this is a journalist reporting what the Bishop (or whoever was speaking) said and not a verbatim account. In any case, even if these may not be the exact words, the gist of the speech is there. According to Bishop Grech, this “European principle was also adopted by the EU in the Lisbon Treaty. By way of this principle: “when a particular object was suspected to be dangerous, it was withdrawn from society by the people responsible for the common good.”

And this is the lovely bit. As usual, I will insert the standard caveat that far be it from me to tell the Church and its representatives what it has to think about society. But this is an open society – at least we hope it is – and we are entitled to our own reaction to this statement. I am reminded of one of John Dalli’s statements before the members of the European Parliament: “I don’t want to tell people what to eat but I want them to know what they are eating.” Now although Bishop Grech might have used the word “object” inadvertently, here we are talking about food for the mind (and in some cases for the soul).

Bishop Grech would rather that a committee of persons “responsible for the common good” take the intellectual food off your plate before you even get a chance to smell it and wonder whether it is good or not. You cannot blame Bishop Grech… it’s a quite a normal position for a man of the universal church to take. You don’t have to agree with him, though. And I don’t. It’s not the concept of precaution that worries me most you see, but the concept of the “persons responsible for the common good”. Which group of representatives would that be, exactly?

Should it be Parliament and its Committee of Obscenities (sorry I couldn’t resist, it’s actually an Obscenities Committee)? Will Carm Mifsud Bonnici and Owen Bonnici decide what levels of nudity could be dangerous for the mind? Will the crème de la crème of PLPN be trusted to shed their vote-seeking nature and objectively define the standards of safe decency from behind their hastily constructed veil of ignorance? Or is Bishop Grech suggesting that the power of Nihil Obstat be extended to other institutions that feel, in their own right, that they have a say in the moral and practical conduct of our nation?

Bollocks to that. All of it. Unfortunately, the truth (if I may be so bold as to advocate it) of the matter is that we probably deserve such committees and guardians because we may not be as open a nation as we may think. Insofar as majorities, relative or otherwise, go, it is an unavoidable truth that the open-mindedness required to be safely exposed to Alex Vella Gera’s writings, a Playboy centrefold or Kubrick’s Clockwork Orange is not a common currency on the islands of festi, tigijiet and partitarji (feasts, weddings and supporters). Most of us are accustomed to having others think for us (even though we are conned into thinking that the decision is our own) – hence Brother Grech’s suggestion might not sound so bad after all.

Back to the States

Before I digressed into Bishop Grech’s world, I was telling you about developments in America. Let me try to fit in two other interesting events in the legal and political life of the US. First of all, there was a close call Supreme Court ruling (5-4) where the judges decided that there could no longer be any limit to the amount of funds individual companies could give to political parties. Companies are seen as individuals in the eye of US law, and their right to give money to political parties is seen (according to the Supreme Court) as freedom of expression. Thus, limiting the amount of money they could donate (or sponsor) would mean limiting their freedom of expression. Hence the first point – a company is free to give as much as it wants to a party.

Now before the treasurers in Hamrun and Pietà jump with joy at the news from the paragons of democratic discourse (do they still have a treasurer in Hamrun?), there is one other addendum that comes with this freedom of expression. The Supreme Court also ruled that if political adverts are paid for using sponsor money, then the advert must clearly carry the name of the sponsor/donor. It is a normal corollary in a democratic society that funds given to political parties are transparently given. There should be no reason to explain why. It is the same reason why MPs declare their financial assets and MEPs are grilled about their declarations – you cannot be seen to be subjectable to possible blackmail from the funding network. In most countries you declare the money, in Italy they might start having to declare who they slept with – but in any case the principle of transparency applies. Franco do you read me?

The other big news from the US relates to the Massachusetts vote. The Democrats have lost the Senate seat that has been almost a Kennedy birthright for some time now. Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat was lost to Republican Scott Brown – a 1980s male model (made it to Cosmo’s centrefold in June 1982 – the ladies might want to find it before the Mario Grech Search Engine Firewall is installed on the Maltese web). The biggest problem is not simply the loss of the seat but the speed at which the disillusion in Obama-ism in America is spreading. Only a year ago, Obama was giving a speech urging America to unite and forget partisan divisions. Today, Obama has clearly failed on that gargantuan task, and other big projects, like his Health Care Reform, might be the next victims of the renewed divide.

It would seem that the USA’s era of partisanship ushered in during the mid-90s by the Republican mega-majority (inspired by anti-Clintonism) is here to stay for a while longer. Cloners of the message of Change and wannabe progressives are warned. A catchy marketing campaign and a swing favoured by the disillusioned do not a real change make.

Rhapsodical

This weekend I am on a short trip to the land of Bohemia. A thrifty two-day visit to Prague should refresh my memories of the lands beyond the former Iron Curtain. I hope that by the time you read this article hundreds of meteorological predictions on different websites (including the yahoo weather app for the iPhone) will have been proved wrong and that the average daytime temperature in the city in dire need of extra vowels will not have been minus four on the centigrade scale. Whatever the case may be, I hope to have refreshed my fading memories of the Old Town and Charles’ Bridge before boarding the flight back to good old Luxembourg.

As they say in Prague: “Hezký den a tìšíme se na pøíští týden!”

Jacques will have a short blogging period next week on www.jacquesrenezammit.com/jaccuse as the quest for tickets for the San Siro match will continue in Milan.